Sampling housing. Análisis operativo de la vivienda colectiva bajo cinco condiciones contemporáneas

Abstract

Abstract The aim of this research is to create a system of analysis and diagnosis about European collective housing. This system will be based on the cataloguing and blending — sampling — of the main contemporary conditions of dwelling. Certain parameters will be set so that it is possible to create a tool — operative, open and transmissible — from the point of view of the architectonic field. From here, the previous 20 years before 2007 will be studied due to their close relation with the creation of the European Union and, therefore, of a common both European market and legal framework. It is since 2007 that the crisis in the state agency, main cause for the high cases of stock in Europe’s housing, allows the creation of a system of operative analysis in the domestic sphere. This system previously mentioned is the main hypothesis for this thesis. Zygmunt Bauman released Legislators and Interpreters: On Modernity, Post-modernity and Intellectuals in 1987, where he suggests a review of the intellectuals’ roles in the change between a more Post-modern paradigm and Modernist one. This publication launches this debate where the role that intellectuals should have accomplish in the previous years to that date is questioned. It is more important to understand the truth of reality, actual facts, rather than to construct legal structures that are the result of bureaucracy, and hence, closed and opaque. Bauman focuses on the reality that stroke Europe at that time: the creation of new rules to rebuild an old continent. A perceptive interpretation by architects was needed to face that emerging legislation. Moreover, thanks to the free market it was possible to work in countries with legal frameworks and with different languages and regulations — it was in July 1987 when the Single European Act came into effect —. This paragraph will introduce a critique of the reasons, established since the late 80’s in Europe, that have led to the change of paradigm. In order to do that, and as an initial hypothesis, a new view in the divided conception of housing in the 60s will be the main theoretical body to which current computational means will be applied. Hence, an argumentative map from 1987 to 2007 will be designed. This map involves the five main contemporary conditions that presumably embrace a complete study that benefits this research: Adaptability, Sustainability, Connectivity, Habitability and Sociability. The order for choosing these five conditions is structured according to their influence in dwelling, which goes from more public to more private. Hence, Adaptability refers to the temporal factor conditioned by the space-time relation; geographical and climate conditions are embraced by Sustainability; we analyze from a closer lens through Connectivity those relationships of the building with its closer background as well as related spaces that makes the building stand itself from the very inside; Habitability involves the hygiene and dimensions of the interior of the building; and eventually, Sociability comprises the most intimate part of a dwelling, that is, the scope is now on the relationship between its users and the socio-economic possibilities of the building under analysis. In order to define the five conditions that divide this work, it is necessary to explore those authors that were key for the critical thinking of the 80s in Europe. These authors were not part of the compositional conflicts and architectonic language brought by the Modern Movement. From the beginning of the 50s to the first years of the 80s — years that were in parallel with Team X promoting the idea of effervescence and change of paradigm, theory that was put into practice in experiences like PREVI in Lima — a flow of domestic and urban readings can be found — notably of more relational rather than aesthetical conditions — like those published by John Habraken, Victor Olgyay, John Turner, Reyner Banham or Christopher Alexander. In the wake of these thinkers, each condition previously discussed can be matched with a different author who shares this same analysis of the taxonomy of collective housing. Such search and late selection will end with a discussion of the most relevant scholars in the last years, like Tatjiana Schneider & Jeremy Till, Mark DeKay, Aurora Fernández Per & Javier Mozas, Bernard Leupen, Peter Ebner, and Monique Eleb. Each text will be contextualized and the methodology of the analysis will be presented as well as its practical implementation — from that moment to the current date —. Then, after a process of cataloguing, two groups of parameters will be set. The first group includes those parameters that will be part of the final selection, while the second one includes those that will be part of the operating system that will analyze 15 cases of study — three per city —. The goal is the creation of a generic pattern that could be applied to any future similar study case. The strategy based on compiling and selecting is called sampling: it consists in cutting and blending parts of original texts to create and give meaning to a current and more complex reality. This tool useful for joining and matching related intellectuals summarizes the theoretical body of this research: this is the critical thinking that generates our tool. Once such classification and organization has been established, it is necessary to define one by one the 62 parameters of the analysis by the use of sheets, prepared and programmed by us. Each sheet will define the concept under analysis, including the exchange of data from which the parameters are created and an illustrative figure for each parameter that shows very generically its specific spot when should be implemented. This shows how it is possible to elaborate a personalized catalogue that will be useful for the creation of the device that will be applied. After that, this catalogue will be contextualized using five capitals of Europe as case studies. These are Paris, Helsinki, Amsterdam, Madrid and Berlin. The criteria used for the selection of these cities is the fact that each one of them showed certain municipal initiative for the promotion and construction of dwellings concerning their social nature. Moreover, they may be useful as a contextual framework for the authors already cited in this paper. The buildings under analysis are the L’OPAC office in Paris, ARAVASTA and ATT in Helsinki, the renewal of Java Island and KNSM in Amsterdam, the different PAU buildings in Carabanchel, Vallecas and Sanchinarro in Madrid and finally, the Alt IBA’87 from Kreuzberg building in Berlin. These 15 cases will be part of the database where the 532 aspects accounted by building will become the sample of the 62 final parameters of the designed graphic. These data are collected in a direct way and they are related to the essential calculations elaborated by a personalized calculation formula. The results obtained are collected and summarized in frames that show the maximum and minimum control rates of the parameters analyzed. It is at this point where the graphic interface of the application Sampling Housing is programmed. A diagnosis based on the graphic and numeric results of the parameters will be carried out taking into account the contemporary and critical view of each parameter. In fact, they will be presented in comparative graphic related to each condition. Therefore, the main objective is the creation of a tool of operating analysis that allows — from five filters — diagnosing the potential for improvement of a selected housing project. This tool would go further than the formal, pragmatic or speculative solutions that are used nowadays. This research will try to defend the existence of possible alternative ways to manage the project of collective housing. It will avoid those categorical definitions that seem perishable or inherited. Scholars like Richard Sennett, Emilio Lledó, Zygmunt Bauman or Marshall Berman will be of great importance for this research since they introduced structures able to decode all complex aspects of reality. All of them are able to define complex systems that allow a rigorous execution of the idea under analysis without neglecting present-day contradictions. Regarding the use of computer-aiding and parameterization tools, two ways to use them have been found: a formal parameterization and critical parameterization. In November 2016, only a few months before Donald Trump was elected as president of the United States, Patrik Schumacher gave a speech in the World Architecture Festival of Berlin. During this speech Schumacher seemed to agree with Trump when stating that certain strategies to end with the public space and social dwelling were needed: ‘In today's political climate it's brave to support free-market capitalism’. Schumacher — who worked with Zaha Hadid since 1988, founded alongside Brett Steele the Design Research Lab (AADRL) in the AA of London in 1996. Moreover, he is the author of the books The Autopoiesis of Architecture, Volumes I and II in 2011 — supports a practice that guarantees a speculation and parameterization of the form. This leads to the investment of capital on the space and shape and leaves aside the possible wealth these tools could offer. This thesis embraces the collaborative effectiveness of such tools; hence, an analysis of the current scientific criteria will be the main focus, even when the current tendency stands for aesthetic appeal.